Tom Wurtz for U.S. Congress Kentucky's 4th District

CN2 Interview With Don Weber

Tom Wurtz — Fri, 18 May 2012 13:19:23 +0000

America Will Not Survive Unless Federal Unions Are Eliminated

Tom Wurtz — Fri, 18 May 2012 12:16:11 +0000

I think I have the story right. God told Adam and Eve that they were forbidden from taking a bite from the big-government apple. They did it anyway, and we have been paying for that original sin ever since. Have you taken a bite of the big-government apple yet? It appears many have as the federal government spends $3.8 trillion while only collecting $2.2 trillion. I may be wrong, but that sounds fiscally insane.

God must love crazy politicians because He made so many of them. So what’s causing federal spending and debt to explode? While there are many factors, Dennis Cauchon of USA Today has penned an alarming article that illustrates how bad our federal mismanagement problem really is. His headline tells it all, “Federal workers more likely to die than be sacked.”I had no idea that the marriage vow, “Till death do us part” also applies to our federal employees.

According to this article, “Last year, the government fired none of its 3,000 meteorologists, 2,500 health insurance administrators, 1,000 optometrists, 800 historians or 500 industry property managers. The 1,800-employee Federal Communications Commission and the 1,200-employee Federal Trade Commission didn’t layoff or fire a single employee last year. The nearly half-million federal employees earning $100,000 or more enjoyed a 99.82% job security rate in 2010. Only 27 of 35,000 federal attorneys were fired last year. None [were] laid off. Death claimed 33.”

Why doesn’t Congress crack down on government employees’ poor performance? Why has the merit system been destroyed and incompetence ignored? I recently watched a video of Congressman Geoff Davis leading a Human Resource Subcommittee on data standardization or data matching. The goal of this program is to improve state and federal benefit programs which I believe the federal government should not even be involved in.

During Congressman Davis’s opening remarks, I learned why the federal government is a financial nightmare and why new leadership in the U.S. House is needed. Here is a portion of his comments, “One of the initial factors driving this effort was the level of federal improper payments which peaked at $125 billion in FY2010.” After this statement he continued with his opening remarks as he said nothing dramatic. I could not have continued speaking as casually as Congressman Davis did after that fiscally corrupt statement.

If I was addressing that subcommittee, I would have stopped and slammed my fist on the desk to wake up sleeping members of Congress and made the following statement, “As a representative of the people, I demand a full investigation into this incompetent federal behavior and I will not proceed until the top 1,000 federal managers who permitted this $125 billion waste of taxpayer money are immediately fired.” Someone must stand and fight for the taxpayers. Why wasn’t Congressman Davis screaming for accountability on federal employees? Is he afraid of the unions? Is it too difficult to fire federal employees? This carelessness must stop now!

In a related story, JP Morgan recently lost $2 billion in a trading strategy. Many in Congress are yelling for more regulations on the financial industry. Why isn’t Congress demanding leaders in these federal agencies be fired as they have sought the head of JP Morgan’s leaders? Is it possible that corruption, waste and abuse is so common in the federal government that its just accepted as another day at the office. We need new leaders in Congress that believe accountability matters. Yes, even if they are federal union employees.

When did this union entitlement culture begin in the federal government? I had no idea that President John Kennedy could make one decision and America could be brought to the brink of financial disaster. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10988. This order permitted federal workers to engage in collective bargaining and opened the door for states and cities to do the same. In my opinion, it is the biggest single act that has led America to our current financial nightmare. Why?

I agree with the Roosevelts. President Teddy Roosevelt vehemently opposed federal unions and extended policies prohibiting federal union workers from even talking to Congress. In 1902, he issued Executive Order 163 prohibiting union workers from, “individually or through associations, [soliciting] an increase of pay, or to influence or to attempt to influence in their own interest any legislation whatever, either before Congress or its Committees, or in any way save through the heads of the Departments in or under which they serve, on penalty of dismissal from the government service.”

He twice issued Executive Orders expanding the restrictions on collective bargaining for federal workers. Even President Franklin Delano Roosevelt believed that allowing government employees to organize and strike against the taxpayers was “unthinkable and intolerable.”

In 1955, George Meany (what a great name for a union leader), President of the AFL-CIO said, “It is impossible to collectively bargain with the government.” When you permit weak, self-interested, voter-loving politicians and self-interested, dues-loving labor leaders in the same room with taxpayers’ money, only bad things will happen.

I believe it’s time for Congress to pass the following legislation – Federal Unions Must Go Before America Is Gone Act. This bill will require federal unions to be phased out of the federal government by July 4^th of 2013. It only seems right that taxpayers celebrate our independence from the federal government’s union oppression while we are celebrating our independence from British oppression.

Unions in the federal government must be eliminated or fiscal accountability will never be achieved.

If you agree that we need a leader in Congress who will hold federal employees accountable, I would appreciate your support in the May 22^ndRepublican Primary.

Next Article: May 21st – It’s Time to Vote! Mother Theresa, Thomas Jefferson & My Campaign

Tom Wurtz is a constitutional-conservative who is running for U.S. Congress, Kentucky’s 4th District. Please feel free to forward these articles to your family and friends. The secret to America’s comeback will be the educated voter. New articles are posted at TomWurtz.com every Monday, Wednesday & Friday. If you have any questions or comments, please email Tom at tom@tomwurtz.com.

Leftist Norm Chomsky Agrees With Tom Wurtz on Phony Media Candidates

Tom Wurtz — Wed, 16 May 2012 19:19:23 +0000

It’s not often that leftist Norm Chomsky agrees with Sarah Palin and Tom Wurtz in the same video. Chomsky admits that President Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was an illusion based on nothing. It was just an effective media campaign. He also agrees that politics today is all controlled by media firms with no discussion on issues. This has been my message for the last three months.

My website offers over 70,000 words on my positions on the issues facing America today. I urge you to checkout the other candidates’ issue sections on their websites. You will not find much depth. The top media advertising candidates have 600, 900 and 1,200 words. Voter education is not important to them. Their American Political Idol image is all that counts. Voters deserve substance. Gook Luck with your research!

Please check out Chomsky’s admission about President Obama’s campaign below:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/noam-chomsky-sarah-palin-was-right-about-obama/

The Word Marriage Is Taken, Find Your Own Word

Tom Wurtz — Wed, 16 May 2012 10:59:28 +0000

I don’t believe in same-sex marriage. I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. The definition of marriage has been codified into our religions, society and laws. The word marriage is already taken. Why would we change the meaning of marriage? Supporters of same-sex unions should find their own word and if they are so inclined, pursue that word’s legal standing.

North Carolina recently became the 30^th state to pass a marriage protection amendment. These amendments define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Since the Obama Administration has previously stated they will no longer enforce President Bill Clinton’s Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, states have had to pass their own laws. Again, the federal government defies the U.S. Constitution and federal laws as if they are above all laws. This issue is bizarre to me.

It would be like the color purple wanting to now be called blue because it feels slighted because it’s never mentioned in patriotic songs. The color purple says it just wants the same respect as the color blue. But in order to accomplish purple’s wish, the entire history of the world would need to be rewritten. And, once one color changes teams, many colors will do the same and the Age of Redefinition will consume America. Nothing will make sense anymore.

Why is this issue so important? In America, two men and two women can live together. They can hire a band and have a reception with their friends and families without incident. So what’s all the drama about? I believe this issue is all about money because the word “marriage” entitles couples to partake in religious, social and financial rewards. Since same-sex unions are permitted, but not legally recognized in 41 states, partners are not entitled to the benefits of a traditional marriage – medical benefits, tax benefits or employment benefits.

Same-sex marriage is about confiscating an important word (marriage) and hoping to receive the legal standing as if that word applied to them. I understand the scam, but the word marriage is already taken.

President Obama recently “evolved” into endorsing same-sex marriage. Why is it when Republicans change their position they are called hypocrites and when a Democrat changes their position they are simply “evolving?” The President is quoted as saying, “I want everyone treated fairly in this country.” I find his statement to be odd at best. For example, if he is seeking fairness for everyone why doesn’t the President make public statements eliminating the following unfair actions?

Affirmative Action – Preferential treatment based on race. That’s not fair.

Waivers from ObamaCare – Preferential treatment based on political connections. That’s not fair.

Federal Retirements – Social Security kicks in with partial retirement benefits at 65 for private sector citizens while federal workers can retire with full benefits in their forties and fifties. That’s not fair.

Green Energy – Federal government literally giving money to campaign donors to pursue green businesses at the same time the federal government is passing regulations destroying their “evil” competition. That’s not fair.

Progressive Taxes – Federal government punishing selected Americans by charging different tax rates to different Americans. Do these Americans receive more services from the federal government for their inflated tax rates? Nope! That’s not fair.

Crony-Capitalism – Preferential treatment to politically connected businesses so the federal government can pick winners and losers in the federally controlled “free market.” That’s not fair.

I guess “fairness” is all in the eye of the beholder.

I’m still shocked that same-sex marriage is a serious discussion. The simple reality is that the word marriage is already taken and has been well-defined for thousands of years. Do we now need to pass laws to confirm that 2 + 2 = 4? Once Americans allow our words and principles to be redefined, we will lose our history, traditions and identity.

Wait a minute! That reminds me of something Michelle Obama said during the 2008 presidential campaign, “Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history; we’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation.”

I believe President Obama’s acceptance of same-sex marriage is part of his fundamentally transforming America by destroying everything we hold dear, such as marriage. I say it’s time we fundamentally transform America back into America by first defending marriage, restoring the U.S. Constitution and then let’s send the marxists, socialists and communists back into the shadows where they belong.

If you agree, I would appreciate your support in the May 22^ndRepublican Primary.

Next Article: May 18th – America Will Be Destroyed Unless Federal Unions Are Eliminate

Can Money Buy Uneducated Voters?

Tom Wurtz — Mon, 14 May 2012 06:00:30 +0000

One of my favorite quotes from President Ron Reagan is, “Don’t be afraid to see what you see.” I have always followed this philosophy. So here is what I see. It’s blunt and unfiltered.

Is it easier to manipulate uneducated voters or educated voters? Let’s face it; President Obama’s 2008 election win is the zenith of what happens when uneducated voters vote in large numbers. I believe voters knew less about President Obama’s life, credentials, influencers and experiences than any elected official in my lifetime.

The President was only in the U.S. Senate for a very short time before he was anointed as the American savior. How can that happen? The answer is always the same – money. Big money is the fuel that creates a “movie-star” image, but it takes lots of money to pull it off and lots of uneducated voters to buy the illusion.

In America’s 2008 presidential election, President Obama spent $730 million on his campaign. He received 69 million votes. It cost him $10.58 per vote. In contrast, Senator John McCain spent $333 million and received 60 million votes. His presidential bid cost him $5.55 per vote. Since no one had a clue who Barack Obama was, the political puppetmasters needed enormous cash to carefully create a character that uneducated voters could rally around. As we have now learned, his presidential “character’s” words and the real President Obama’s actions are in complete contradiction.

How did Americans elect an illusion to the most power position on earth? The answer is the power of money.

The current race for Kentucky’s Congressional 4^th District seat is a buzz with the amount of money Thomas Massie and his Super Pacs are spending on his campaign. The number is around $800,000. That’s amazing! If he secures 7,500 votes in this race, he will have paid $106.67 per vote. His campaign will make President Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign look like a political lemonade stand.

Why would someone or group of supporters spend $800,000 for a position that pays $174,000 per year? Would you and your supporters spend $230,000 to help you secure a $50,000 a year job? Would strangers flood you with donations because you’re a terrific person? Probably not!

So who is Thomas Massie? Just like President Obama, he came out of nowhere. He was living off the grid (his words) in Lewis County before running for Lewis County Judge-executive. He has only been in this position about a year where he manages a $1 million general fund. In Kentucky’s 2011 governor’s Republican primary, only 683 voters voted in Lewis County’s Republican Primary. So where is all this financial excitement coming from?

But wait, it now turns bizarre. It’s been reported that a rich college kid in Texas has purchased a media package of $500,000 to help Thomas Massie get elected. Why? Why would a Texas college kid be so interested in a Congressional race in Kentucky? I can’t believe even passive uneducated voters could “buy” this political storyline.

Money should be irrelevant in any political campaign. I don’t care if someone from the Sam Houston Kindergarten School in Texas donated $1 billion to any candidate in this race because I know that money will not be spent on voter education. It will only be spent on fluffy ads filled with typical political rhetoric like “eliminate government waste, balance the budget, and create jobs.” Isn’t that the same message that every politician has run for the last fifty years? Isn’t the obvious question, “How do you specifically plan to do that?” Unfortunately, substance has no place when you’re spending $800,000 on a campaign image.

I see America changing. I believe voters are tired of campaign and financial puppetmasters controlling our political process. I believe substance is about to make a huge comeback. Substance does not cost anything. The Internet is free.

I have built my entire campaign on voter education by posting over 70,000 words at www.TomWurtz.com. I have spent less than $5,000 on my campaign as I don’t believe in buying uneducated voters with political eye-candy. I don’t do fluffy television commercials, silly signs or high school stickers. I offer my thoughts on the issues and I take positions so voters can make an educated decision. Isn’t that what a candidate is supposed to do? Provide details, not platitudes?

I urge you to visit all seven candidates’ websites and see who is working hard to earn your vote. America is on the brink of disaster and we need tough leaders who are not afraid to see what they see and bluntly say it.

Here is why I believe I am the best legislator for Congress.

Congress must cut debt, spending, taxes and regulations by 40% over the next 4 years.
Congress must exit Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Welfare over a 10 year period. These programs account for $2.2 trillion of the federal government’s $2.2 trillion in annual revenue.
Congress must cut corporate and individual federal income tax rates to a flat 10% to create jobs and bring simplicity and clarity to the business community.
Congress must place a 10-year moratorium on the EPA and all unelected czars and begin defunding and dismantling these agencies.
Congress must unleash America’s energy entrepreneurs so the United States can achieve 90% energy independence in 10 years.
Once our energy independence is secure, America’s military can begin exiting the Middle East as the U.S.A. will no longer be held hostage by Middle East oil thugs.
Congress must still defend Israel’s right to exist.
Congress must compress the U.S. Military to only focus on protecting America and America’s interest.

Please checkout the “categories” section of my website for more details concerning my proposals. I believe my website will enhance your political education more than the $800,000 that is going to be spent producing the next American Political Idol.

Congress needs leaders who aren’t afraid to see what they see. Do you see what I see?

If so, I would appreciate your support on May 22^nd.

Next Article: May 16th – The Word Marriage Is Taken, Find Your Own Word

Top Money Candidates Are NOT Conservatives

Tom Wurtz — Fri, 11 May 2012 06:00:25 +0000

What does a conservative stand for? Most conservatives I know believe in limited government, fiscal responsibility, free markets, energy independence, low taxes, minimum regulations and maximum freedoms. I agree, but do the top money candidates running for the U.S. Congress believe in these conservative principles? I don’t believe so.

Judge-executive Thomas Massie

According to his website, he believes, “Congress has the power of the purse. I will encourage them to cut real spending by one-percent each year until the budget is balanced. This is commonly referred to as the “Penny Plan.” Cuts of one-percent per year is hardly austere and, if implemented soon, can balance the budget by 2019.”

This plan makes no sense to me. The Penny Plan would reduce federal spending by 1% over six years for a total of $228 billion. This reduction will reduce annual spending from $3.8 trillion to $3.6 trillion. The federal revenue is only $2.2 trillion. Even though he has repeatedly said that the federal debt is his number one concern, his plan illustrates that he does not believe that federal spending is the problem to our debt crisis.

I don’t know a single conservative that doesn’t believe the federal government has a spending problem. I believe Congress should cut federal spending by $1.5 trillion over four years. Conservatives don’t believe Congress should kick this debt can down the road for six years and let others deal with this mess later.

Mr. Massie has stated he believes in means-testing for Social Security. What’s that? Means-testing is just an academic way of saying that Social Security should be turned into a welfare program. The government will decide if you already have enough money and whether you will receive any Social Security. It’s the classic example of government marxism by picking winners and losers and redistributing wealth based on politics.

It’s sad that a conservative would think that a taxpayer who is forced into a “benefit” program with the government would support the government’s right to dishonor its deal. This big government mindset protects big government’s bureaucracies and abuses the taxpayers. No conservative would believe in means-testing Social Security. I know I don’t.

State Representative Alecia Webb-Edgington

Mrs. Webb-Edgington believes in Pell grants for college education. Pell grants are educational welfare that do not require repayment. At the candidate debate on April 30^th, she stated, “We can pay now or we can pay later.” She was indicating that if government doesn’t pay for free college education now, taxpayers will be forced to pay later in the criminal justice system.

Her position bothered me as it sounds like a big government mindset. She was lecturing taxpayers that we could pay now or pay later, but make no mistake; the taxpayers are going to pay big government.

Conservatives don’t believe in the marxist theory of redistribution of wealth. Conservatives believe in personal responsibility and self-reliance. I believe the federal government should exit the education business all together. That way federal taxpayers will not need to pay for free education now or later.

Mrs. Webb-Edgington has served in Kentucky’s General Assembly as a state representative since 2008. During that time, she sponsored thirteen bills. Eleven of those bills never left the committee status. The only two bills that became law were HB469 (2008) concerning underground utility damage prevention and HB447 (2010) that permitted parochial schools and churches to require criminal background checks every five years. None of the other eleven bills submitted had anything to do with limited government, fiscal responsibility, free markets, energy independence, low taxes, minimum regulations and maximum freedoms. How could a conservative not submit one bill in five years based on conservative principles? The facts about her record shocked me.

Did Mrs. Webb-Edgington sign the Northern Kentucky Area Planning Commission (NKAPC) petition drive along with over 24,000 Kenton County voters or did she side with the Northern Kentucky’s political country club? It’s a good question to ask her. The petition drive was to place the NKAPC’s future on the November ballot to permit “We the People” to decide its fate. Kenton County is the only county of Kentucky’s 120 counties to have such a taxing authority.

Kentucky’s new Democratic State Auditor, Adam Edelen, has announced plans to audit the approximately 1,500 out-of-control taxing authorities that answer to no one. If Webb-Edgington is a fiscal-conservative, why hasn’t she proposed any legislation to rein in these out-of-control taxing agencies that constantly raise our taxes/rates by 4-20% per year? Are you receiving a 4-20% raise per year on your income? Any fiscal-conservative would have been attacking these agencies long ago. I know I would have because I was fighting this issue for over a year as a concerned citizen.

The Kentucky Club for Growth does not believe she is a fiscal-conservative. In their 2010 General Assembly scorecard they rated her fiscal voting record at 53 points out of 100.

Judge-executive Gary Moore

Gary Moore’s website proudly states, “Through my policies of streamlining processes, cutting red-tape and lowering taxes, we have seen over 13,000 new jobs created…” But wait, there’s more to the story. During the first seven years (1999 – 2005) as Boone County Judge-executive, Boone County’s unemployment rate averaged 4.1%. I guess it’s obvious “his policies” were working great. (As a side note, the six years prior to Moore’s election (1994–1999) Boone County’s unemployment rate averaged 3.6%. Well, maybe “his policies” were not working as well as I thought.)

But over the last six-plus years (2006-2012), Boone County’s unemployment rate averaged 7.0%. An increase of over 70%. It appears “his policies” were no longer the solution for Boone County’s workers. Why?

If Moore created pro-business conditions during his first seven years to achieve low unemployment rates, he then must have created an anti-business atmosphere over the last six-plus years when unemployment rates skyrocketed by 70%. Which is it? Or, is it possible that a county judge-executive has nothing to do with economic development in his county and it’s really the private sector that creates jobs, not politicians.

If a politician takes credit for the good times, shouldn’t they take the blame for the bad times? Conservatives credit the free market for job creation. When politicians take credit for their centralized-planning expertise that they don’t have, they illustrate that they believe big government creates jobs. Conservatives get real nervous when big government addicts start explaining how “their policies” drive the free market

Mr. Moore also supports the REINS Act that permits Congress to have a vote on all legislation that has a financial impact of $100 million or more. I believe the REINS Act illustrates how weak Congress has become. I don’t know any conservatives that believe Congress needs to seek permission from unelected bureaucrats to defend the American people. Article 1, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Conservatives believe in the U.S. Constitution, non-conservatives seek permission from bureaucrats.

I believe the records of the top three money candidates are more liberal and progressive than conservative. Please check out my articles and decide if my conservative principles match yours. If they do, I would appreciate your support on May 22^nd.

Next Article: May 14th – Can Money Buy Uneducated Voters?

Wars on Terror & Poverty Were Never Meant To Be Won

Tom Wurtz — Wed, 09 May 2012 06:00:40 +0000

America is broke! The federal government spends $3.8 trillion annually while only collecting $2.2 trillion. Our record-setting debt is now approaching $16 trillion. Every candidate “talks” about reducing the debt, but details are hard to gather. Here are two areas that Congress must address if our debt crisis is going to be solved.

The United States continues to fight the War on Terror (10 years) and the War on Poverty (50 years). Can these wars be won? The more I research these “wars,” I keep reaching the same conclusion. I don’t believe big government has any intention of winning the war on terror or poverty. Could that statement possibly be true?

How can America win a war when we don’t even know who the enemy is or how to define victory? How long have acts of terror existed in America? How long has poverty existed in America? Both answers are the same. Terror and poverty have existed in America since day one. I’ve concluded that the wars on terror and poverty will never end because they were never meant to end.

The primary losers in these “wars” are brave Americans and the 50% of Americans who finance these never-ending wars. Wars should only be declared by Congress and a clear definition of victory must be established. It’s time to declare victory or declare defeat in these wars, but whatever is declared, it’s time to stop government waste that is bankrupting America and killing our finest.

So why did the United States declare a War on Terror after 9/11 and dramatically increase the size of government? Unfortunately, because the opportunity for big government to gain power, control and money presented itself. After 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security was created and currently employs over 200,000 employees with a 2011 budget of $98.8 billion.

As a result of this invisible war, Americans have lost courageous soldiers and many of our freedoms – TSA security at airports, Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act and the newly passed Cyber Intelligence Act passed in the House all violate the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments. America no longer feels like a free country. It feels more like the former police-state of the Soviet Union. Why do we permit this to happen?

President Lyndon Johnson declared War on Poverty in the 1960s. So how is America doing in this war? Big government has spent $19.8 TRILLION on welfare and we have 44 million people living in poverty today. It’s stunning how federal spending in this one program is more than the entire national debt of nearly $16 trillion that took America 223 years to accumulate.

Again, America is engaged in another invisible war against an invisible enemy. Poverty cannot be defeated as it’s part of every society. So why do we keep expanding government to fight an un-winnable war?

It’s time for Congress to transition out of the War on Poverty and return management of welfare to the states and charities. It’s also time for Congress to reevaluate the War on Terror to define an ending to this war. The only end game I can see is the continuing surrender of our constitutional rights all in the name of big government protection.

If elected, I will fight to engage this discussion in Congress and push to bring these wars to a conclusion. Congress must begin to fight the biggest war in America’s history – The Second War for Independence. It has begun, but many Americans don’t realize it yet. It will be a titanic clash of massive government marxists, socialists and communists against constitutional, freedom-loving Americans. That’s a war “We the People” cannot afford to lose.

If you agree it’s time to elect a leader who’s dedicated to fighting the biggest enemies facing America, I would appreciate your support on May 22^nd.

Next Article: May 11th – Top Money Candidates Are NOT Conservatives

Congressional Pay Based on Merit, Not Pension Gimmicks!

Tom Wurtz — Mon, 07 May 2012 06:00:18 +0000

A few candidates have grabbed headlines by stating they would not accept a government pension. On the campaign trail, I’ve called that pledge cheap political theater. It’s irrelevant if one person does or does not collect a pension. If you don’t want or need the money send it all back. Don’t grandstand about it. It’s time for cheap political gimmicks to exit politics and return to high school class president races where they belong. America needs members of Congress to solve massive problems. Results matter, not gimmicks.

Politics is the only profession where rhetoric and image is more important than results. I believe a more relevant discussion is how “We the People” should compensate each member of Congress.

I would propose legislation called The U.S. Congress Accountability Pay Act. I’m a businessman who believes in pay for results. This Act would establish specific goals for Congress. Here are a few of my personal goals:

Create a pro-business atmosphere where the unemployment rate drops to 5% or less (currently 8.1%)
Reduce the U.S. debt by a minimum of $250 billion per year (currently U.S. debt increases by a trillion dollars per year.)
Reduce yearly federal spending to 15% of Gross Domestic Product (Currently 24%)
Reduce federal corporate and individual income taxes to a flat 10%. No American should pay more than 10% of all of their income in federal taxes
Return the United States to the #1 ranking in the Index of Economic Freedom (currently 10^th)
The United States must improve our energy independence by 10% year per year.
Members of Congress must grow a spine and defund and dismantle the EPA before it destroys our businesses, freedoms and our energy sources.
Members of Congress must agree to receive no compensation in any form outside of their congressional salary. If this provision is violated, they will be subject to a minimum sentence of 20 years in maximum security prison and must listen to Rosanne Barr sing the national anthem on a daily basis. I know this form of torture is worse than waterboarding and it may be controversial.

Each of these measurements will be captured when each member of Congress in sworn into office and will be used as their benchmarks.

So what happens if those goals are not met? Here is my financial model for members of Congress assuming they are reelected:

Starting salary $174,000 (current level), plus medical and pension benefits.

Defined goals achieved: Annual salary increases to $250,000, plus medical and pension benefits. (Results matter!)

All defined goals not achieved after four-years in office: Annual salary and pension is reduced to zero. Hopefully, “We the People” will then vote them out of office.

Now that’s a pledge. If Congress does not pass an Act like this, I would take a personal pledge to do so. If you can’t fix a problem, at least have the character to get out of the way and give someone else a shot.

Many people will question this formula and complain that no one would accept a job under these conditions. I agree. Incompetent people will not apply. The only candidates who will apply will be highly qualified with a tremendous sense of urgency dedicated to achieving results. That will be a good thing.

The truth is people in the private-sector work under tougher employment conditions everyday. In the private-sector you produce or you’re fired. Only politicians are not held accountable for failure. It’s time to change that model.

Congressional pay based on merit matters. Pension gimmicks don’t!

If you agree it’s time for a business leader with new ideas to go to Congress, I would appreciate your support on May 22^nd.

Next Article: May 9th – Why the War on Terror & Poverty Were Never Meant To Be Won

How Would You Vote On Gov’t Spying?

Tom Wurtz — Fri, 04 May 2012 06:00:01 +0000

Is Congress fighting to protect our freedoms? It seems everyday the Dudley-Do-Rights in Congress pass legislation to reduce our freedoms and expand big government all under the benevolent goal of protecting Americans.

On April 26^th, the U.S. House passed H.R. 3523, The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). The House passed the bill by a vote of 248-168, Congressman Geoff Davis abstained. H.R. 3523 stated purpose is “to provide for the sharing of certain cyber threat intelligence and cyber threat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities, and for other purposes.” I always hate that last part – for other purposes.

Congress believes this latest attempt to gain control of the internet is critical for our national security, but then again isn’t every bill sold to Americans to protect us from some dark and sinister force. It’s purpose is to gain control of activities on the Internet. Now it gets scary!

On Monday April 30^th, I watched the Glenn Beck Program and listened to four former National Security Agency (NSA) executives talk about a new data storage facility in Utah that is the size of 17 football fields. Think of the size of your company’s computer room and you will understand how much data they will be accumulating on “terrorists.”

This week I read H.R. 3523 to see if its focus is to monitor foreign nations attempting to use technology to attack American businesses and government agencies. I also wanted to know if they plan on targeting American citizens as well. Here is CISPA’s stated purpose:

‘‘(A) for cybersecurity purposes; (B) for the investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crimes; (C) for the protection of individuals from the danger of death of serious bodily harm and the investigation and prosecution of crimes involving such danger of death or serious bodily harm; (D) for the protection of minors from child pornography, any risk of sexual exploitation, and serious threats to the physical safety of such minor, including kidnapping and trafficking and the investigation and prosecution of crimes involving child pornography, any risk of sexual exploitation, and serious threats to the physical safety of minors, including kidnapping and trafficking.”

What? Is child pornography a national security threat now?

I found the following section of the law covering the protection of individual information to also be quite concerning.

‘‘The Federal Government may, consistent with the need to protect Federal systems and critical information infrastructure from cybersecurity threats and to mitigate such threats, undertake reasonable efforts to limit the impact on privacy and civil liberties of the sharing of cyber threat information with the Federal Government pursuant to this subsection.” Uh-oh! The federal government will “attempt” to limit the impact on our privacy and civil liberties. I didn’t realize protecting our freedoms is optional.

The Fourth Amendment states, “The right to the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” If this bill does become law, the government can spy on us and violate our constitutional rights.

I also found the following section in H.R. 3523 alarming. It specifically prohibits federal searches in eight areas:

Library circulation records
Library patron listings
Book sales records
Book customer lists
Firearm sales records
Tax return records
Educational records
Medical records.

Why didn’t the law prohibit authorities from viewing our emails, email distribution lists, telephone records and banking records? For “protection” reasons, we now have cameras everywhere in America and now the federal government can spy on our electronic communications and transactions.

I would not have voted for H.R. 3523. Unfortunately, 88% of Republicans voted for this legislation.

Founding Father Noah Webster explains today’s politicians’ addiction to power and control, “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”

This destruction of our freedoms must stop! It appears 1984 has finally arrived in 2012.

If you agree it’s time for constitutional leadership to return to Congress, I would appreciate your support on May 22^nd.

P.S. – Please ask the other candidates how they would have voted on H.R. 3523.

Next Article: May 7th – Refusing to Accept a Pension Is a Gimmick, Here’s How “We the People” Should Determine Compensation for Congress

Common Sense Foreign Aid Act

Tom Wurtz — Wed, 02 May 2012 06:00:09 +0000

Let’s put this issue in its proper perspective by removing eight zeros from a few numbers to help us understand it better. The federal government spends $3.8 trillion ($38,000) per year. America’s annual foreign aid is $53 billion ($530). It’s not a huge amount, but waste is waste and all federal spending waste must be eliminated. Remember, Congress cannot find $2.4 billion ($24) to rebuild the Brent Spence Bridge in Northern Kentucky. Congress is becoming an embarrassment.

What is the purpose of foreign aid anyway? Foreign aid is used for military ($15 billion) and economic ($38 billion) aid to 182 or 95% of all countries. The United States tries to buy strategic alliances and influence with taxpayer money.

Here is a breakdown of where the 182 countries that receive U.S. foreign aid are located:

48 – Sub-Saharan Africa

47 – Europe & Eurasia

37 – Asia

31 – Latin America & Caribbean

18 – Middle East

1 – Canada

Why does the U.S. government confiscate money from U.S. taxpayers and then redistribute it globally? Isn’t foreign aid simply international welfare? How can the United States, that currently spends $3.8 trillion per year with revenues of $2.2 trillion with a nearly $16 trillion debt, afford to do this? We can’t. So why do we do it?

For the past 100 years, the United States has been fundamentally transforming into the United Global Countries Financed by American Taxpayers. I believe it’s time to start fundamentally changing it back to the United States of America.

Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states the role of the federal government as follows, “…and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…” All foreign aid must be measured against its value to protect America’s national defense.

The founding fathers never intended the United States to be a global charity organization. If Americans wish to donate to international charities, that decision is up to each individual American, not the federal government.

I propose the Common Sense Foreign Aid Act where each foreign aid tax dollar must pass the following three provisions:

Will this aid directly protect America’s national defense?
Will this aid directly protect a vital and strategic interest?
Congress must vote up or down on each countries foreign aid on a yearly basis to make sure America’s national interest is at stake.

I also propose that foreign aid be cut as follows:

Year One – Cut from $53 billion to $26 billion

Year Two – Cut from $26 billion to $13 billion

Year Three – Cut from $13 billion to $5 billion and Congress must maintain that level until the federal budget is balanced and they have reduced the federal debt by 10%.

I believe in national sovereignty. I do not like the trend of a “New World Order” where the United Nations and global interest dictate how U.S. tax dollars are spent. I recently saw a television commercial for the U.S. Navy that still bothers me. The U.S. Navy slogan displayed at the end of the commercial read A Global Force for Good. Excuse me?

That slogan must be changed to Defending America’s Freedom Since 1798. What’s happening to us? Why is Congress allowing America to be fundamentally transformed to a Global Force for Good while American businesses and freedoms are being attacked by our own government?

In 1796, George Washington sent a letter to James Monroe concerning his views on foreign affairs, “I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation had a right to inter-meddle in the internal concerns of another;…and that, if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest and every other consideration.”

I believe Congress must redesign the foreign aid policies of the United States. It’s time for taxpayers to start retaining their hard earned money and the global taxtakers to start accepting personal responsibility for their own nations. The United States is broke.

If you agree, I would appreciate your support on May 22^nd.

Next Article: May 4th – CISPA: Is Your Computer Spying on You?

Tom Wurtz is a constitutional-conservative who is running for U.S. Congress, Kentucky 4th District. Please feel free to forward these articles to your family and friends. The secret to America’s comeback will be the educated voter. New articles are posted at TomWurtz.com every Monday, Wednesday & Friday. If you have any questions or comments, please email Tom at tom@tomwurtz.com.